From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/3] xen-blkfront/xen-blkback trim support
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 11:32:12 -0400
Message-ID: <20110829153212.GB11489@dumpdata.com>
References: <1314177825-22360-1-git-send-email-lidongyang@novell.com>
	<20110824141754.GZ32373@reaktio.net>
	<20110826171048.GB2343@dumpdata.com>
	<CAKH3R49tSR9B9jsa=-q-jTOEeK+4B4e0mvGT-PrqGEb41PHWSA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAKH3R49tSR9B9jsa=-q-jTOEeK+4B4e0mvGT-PrqGEb41PHWSA@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Li Dongyang <lidongyang@novell.com>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@eu.citrix.com>, keir@xen.org
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, owen.smith@citrix.com, JBeulich@novell.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 03:47:37PM +0800, Li Dongyang wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 1:10 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 05:17:54PM +0300, Pasi K=E4rkk=E4inen wrote:
> >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 05:23:42PM +0800, Li Dongyang wrote:
> >> > Dear list,
> >> > this is the V3 of the trim support for xen-blkfront/blkback,
> >>
> >> Isn't the generic name for this functionality "discard" in Linux?
> >
> >>
> >> and "trim" being the ATA specific discard-implementation,
> >> and "scsi unmap" the SAS/SCSI specific discard-implementation?
> >
> > Yeah. I think you are right. The 'feature-discard' sounds much much
> > more generic than the 'trim'. Since we are still implementing this
> > and I think we can take the liberty of making it 'feature-discard'.
> yeah, that's why I use "feature-discard" in the patch at the first time=
.
> but since the header has already BLKIF_OP_TRIM so I changed that in
> later versions.
> and agree with u feature-discard makes more sense, maybe we also need t=
o rename
> BLKIF_OP_TRIM to BLKIF_OP_DISCARD?

Lets get Keir and Ian's input on this.